Skip to main content

Consistent Velocity but Increasing Feature Cycle Time – How to Analyze and Improve Flow at ART Level?

Last post 12:23 am September 22, 2025 by Pierre Pienaar
3 replies
08:39 pm September 13, 2025

Although the team’s sprint velocity appears consistent, the feature cycle time is increasing. WIP limits cannot be enforced, dependencies are unclear, and integration issues are arising with other teams within the ART.

Questions:

  • How would you analyze this situation?
  • What steps would you recommend to improve the team’s flow?
  • How would you ensure coordination at the ART level?

05:30 pm September 15, 2025

Think about the commitments people make so empiricism can be established and maintained, and complexity thereby managed.

For example, each Sprint, are the Developers producing a Done Increment of immediate usable quality that meets a Sprint Goal?


07:32 am September 18, 2025

In fact this question belongs more to Scaled Agile website then here, considering that many people at scrum org are skeptical about SAFe to say the least. Having said this I guess it is Release train engineer and System Architect who have to ensure synchronization in SAFe?


12:23 am September 22, 2025

Let's look at this from a Scrum point of view.

My first question would be why is WIP not enforceable? Are too many items being started in parallel, due to org. pressure? WIP are very basic - build a culture of finishing work before starting new items.

But from what you described, the main problems were identified as unclear dependencies and late integration, which are likely driving up the cycle time. These two issues reinforce each other: when dependencies are not visible, they are discovered too late, causing delays and rework. If integration only happens at the end, issues accumulate and delivery slows further. 

These are common signs of teams working in isolation, and also in a team, the team working in silos, i.e. Dev and QA operate seperately and QA coming in at the end of the delivery process.

Make dependencies visible early through cross-team discussions and even program-level planning. Scrum of Scrums or Nexus-style integration teams are example structures, but the exact method matters less than ensuring teams actually talk to one another. Integration also needs to shift left — integrating earlier and start testing earlier, ideally with automation, so that feedback and fixes happen continuously instead of being left until the end.

The overall goal is to move away from focusing only on single team velocity. Getting teams to communicate, find and discuss dependencies. Then integrate and test (new code) earlier, as often as possible, preferable having automation integration tests running on all integrations, i.e. a CI/CD pipeline.


By posting on our forums you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.

Please note that the first and last name from your Scrum.org member profile will be displayed next to any topic or comment you post on the forums. For privacy concerns, we cannot allow you to post email addresses. All user-submitted content on our Forums may be subject to deletion if it is found to be in violation of our Terms of Use. Scrum.org does not endorse user-submitted content or the content of links to any third-party websites.

Terms of Use

Scrum.org may, at its discretion, remove any post that it deems unsuitable for these forums. Unsuitable post content includes, but is not limited to, Scrum.org Professional-level assessment questions and answers, profanity, insults, racism or sexually explicit content. Using our forum as a platform for the marketing and solicitation of products or services is also prohibited. Forum members who post content deemed unsuitable by Scrum.org may have their access revoked at any time, without warning. Scrum.org may, but is not obliged to, monitor submissions.